Open Stack

On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 07:45 -0500, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
> 
> > > [...]
> > >   * much of the problem with the lavish parties is IMO related to
> > > the
> > >     *exclusivity* of certain shindigs, as opposed to devs
> > > socializing at
> > >     summit being inappropriate per se. In that vein, I think the
> > > cores
> > >     party sends the wrong message and has run its course, while
> > > the TC
> > >     dinner ... well, maybe Austin is the time to show some
> > > leadership
> > >     on that? ;)
> > 
> > Well, Tokyo was the time to show some leadership on that -- there 
> > was no "TC dinner" there :)
> 
> Excellent, that is/was indeed a positive step :)
> 
> For the cores party, much as I enjoyed the First Nation cuisine in 
> Vancouver or the performance art in Tokyo, IMO it's probably time to 
> draw a line under that excess also, as it too projects a notion of 
> exclusivity that runs counter to building a community.

Are you sure you're concentrating on the right problem?  Communities
are naturally striated in terms of leadership.  In principle, there's
nothing wrong with "exclusive" events that appear to be rewarding the
higher striations, especially if it acts as an incentive to people to
move up.  It's only actually "elitist" if you reward the top and
there's no real way to move up there from the bottom.  You also want to
be careful about being pejorative; after all the same principle would
apply to the Board Dinner as well.

I think the correct question to ask would be "does the cash spent on
the TC party provide a return on investment either as an incentive to
become a TC or to facililtate communications among TC members?".  If
you answer no to that, then eliminate it.

James